Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42

Thread: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

  1. #21
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    16,648

    Re: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

    Nope. No day labor. It was Sasha himself and his two top lab assistants - worth what combined per hr? $$$$$$$, plus a friend of mine who owned an entire redeveloped block of Emeryville, and a contractor neighbor with a big truck. Sasha paid his key people highly and never did use any day labor. I've seen him run a jackhammer himself by day, then return to his huge deluxe studio in the evening for a gourmet food shoot. He's is still at it in his late 70's, stubborn as heck (two heart attacks); he obviously doesn't need more money or property, but it keeps him going. He made a hard science out of hard work, and still enjoys it.

    Nearly all the day labor was gone along Hearst by then. There was a big Fed roundup of illegals under Obama, and few ever came back to the Hearst corridor, hung out elsewhere.

  2. #22
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    6,201

    Re: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

    Probably a toss up with both types providing nearly identical function. I have both so these enlargers types. No colorful stories, just some comments from actual use of both types over 20 years:

    Stability: I'd say bench is better, because you can affix the column to the back wall. Free standing enlarger on wheels can wobble.

    Maximum Magnification: Again bench is better, because you can make a drop table all the way to the floor. The free-standing enlargers are limited by both the table height mechanism (that is below the table) and the legs of the enlarger. Both of those things keep the table from going all the way to the floor.

    Since both bench and free-standing are essentially identical in performance, a more pertinent question is Horizontal vs Vertical. In that case there are many more differences in how they work and what they can do.

  3. #23
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    16,648

    Re: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

    Anyone should know to wall-brace a free-standing column. That's ABC. Even if it has steel sheave roller for sake of a floor track and optional horizontal use, there are still way's to bolt the support column firmly using a parallel wall or ceiling track. I all use mine now exclusively vertical, so they're anchored and bolted heavily. Gotta. The Hayward Fault is only six blocks away.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,229

    Re: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

    Being a gal with shorter arms than the typical dude, using the Durst 138 was never an arm reaching issue. This Durst 138 has the motorized focus option allowing ease of focus with the base board all the columns distance down.

    Why the need for that much distance between enlarger head to base board, using a 240mm APO process lens for 5x7 _ 13x18cm negatives projected about 4x demands significant E head to base board distance. Shorter focal length lens would absolutely reduce the E head to base board distance trading off light fall off and optical performance of the projection system.

    Why would any floor standing enlarger be allowed to be used with wheels on? Example of the Durst 138, those wheels are designed to be used with a trackway with the enlarger head set to horizontal. Set up this way, the effective distance from enlarger head to "wall board" is altered by wheeling the enlarger forward-backward. And, this is why there are four leveling screws on the base of the Durst 138 for vertical set ups. Once leveled, and properly set up, there is zero reason to not properly secure the enlarger column to the wall. No different than a bookshelf that could fall over if shaken.

    As for removing the base board/table top to gain added enlarger head to projection area distance, it is a hassle in many inconvenience ways.


    Bernice


    Quote Originally Posted by interneg View Post
    In large part these are Durst specific issues - and their belief that 138/ 138s operators had abnormally long right arms.

    With a De Vere, the main reason to get the freestanding (or floor stand for the wall models) is purely for bigger prints than the bench variant can deliver. The bench model base is a precision fitted casting and has further tapped tie-down points (likely for on-ship use) as well as those on the column.

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Rondo, Missouri
    Posts
    2,100

    Re: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

    Quote Originally Posted by Drew Wiley View Post
    ...The Hayward Fault is only six blocks away...

    Can you surf?
    Michael W. Graves
    Michael's Pub

    If it ain't broke....don't fix it!

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Rondo, Missouri
    Posts
    2,100

    Re: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

    Drew, how much vertical space does your enlarger require? I have eight feet two inches of clearance in my darkroom and would like to get an eight by ten enlarger. There is a Durst that's a state away that I could go get, but I would hate to find out I spent a day driving and a bunch of money on the enlarger and can't use it unless I poke a hole in my kitchen floor.

    Which I'm more willing to do than my wife seems to be.
    Michael W. Graves
    Michael's Pub

    If it ain't broke....don't fix it!

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Madisonville, LA
    Posts
    2,386

    Re: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

    Quote Originally Posted by Bernice Loui View Post
    Being a gal with shorter arms than the typical dude, using the Durst 138 was never an arm reaching issue. This Durst 138 has the motorized focus option allowing ease of focus with the base board all the columns distance down.
    Also has a focus extension rod. L

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0345.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	52.5 KB 
ID:	226728Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0346.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	45.6 KB 
ID:	226729

    It goes on the bottom assembly with the set screw.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	SM-183LockScrew.jpg 
Views:	11 
Size:	41.5 KB 
ID:	226751
    Last edited by Luis-F-S; 24-Apr-2022 at 10:43.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Madisonville, LA
    Posts
    2,386

    Re: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Graves View Post
    Drew, how much vertical space does your enlarger require? I have eight feet two inches of clearance in my darkroom and would like to get an eight by ten enlarger. There is a Durst that's a state away that I could go get, but I would hate to find out I spent a day driving and a bunch of money on the enlarger and can't use it unless I poke a hole in my kitchen floor.

    Which I'm more willing to do than my wife seems to be.
    The column should fit with a few inches to spare, the condenser housing probably won't allow full extension.

  9. #29
    Drew Wiley
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SF Bay area, CA
    Posts
    16,648

    Re: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

    MY true Durst L184 8x10 enlarger needs at least 9 ft. But the one that's a L138 5X7 chassis cold-light converted for 8x10 format comfortably fits under less than an 8 ft ceiling, but it all depends on the specific conversion design. You could also use a pancake style LED light source if its totally even. You don't want the added height of a mirror box or diffusion chamber above the carrier. The light source needs its own diffuser.
    Pretty easy to do in that respect.

    Michael - the Hayward Fault did indeed produce far worse soil liquification twice late in the 1800's than the '06 SF quake involving the San Andreas Fault. But the population wasn't as dense on the East Bay. SF was trashed with mudslides; but what made the '06 quake so bad was the fire afterwards. But have a fair amount of Geomorpology training and know about that stuff, so bought my lot on one of the few tongues of granite in the area. But mudstone is not far away. It all depends if you're built over rock or Jello. The worst neighborhoods are built atop landfill.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Iowa City, Iowa
    Posts
    1,462

    Re: Bench vs Freestanding Enlargers

    Quote Originally Posted by Tin Can View Post
    Once again no picture proof of anything from our experts!

    Here is Howard Bond's DIY conversion of a Beseler 45 V-XL to 8X10

    I bought from his 7' high basement enlarger space, it is now on my wall, mounted exactly as he did it, I also use his print stage, a simple DIY wood table with leg adjusters

    The 5X7 Elwood also came with a wall mount option

    Some of you may remember his art, his copious research and writings on forums and in books
    8X10 Howard Bond DIY by TIN CAN COLLEGE, on Flickr

    Elwwod 5X7 Wall Mount by TIN CAN COLLEGE, on Flickr
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20210104_162513.jpg 
Views:	62 
Size:	65.5 KB 
ID:	226746
    My 8x10 and 5x7 Zone VI model 2 mounted on wall, a couple feet above concrete floor, no ambient vibrations works for me. I crank them up out of the way as I use a couple bench mounted Beseler 45 MXT

Similar Threads

  1. MLC 810 - Optical Bench DIY
    By robyz1984 in forum LF DIY (Do It Yourself)
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 3-Dec-2018, 17:15
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 26-Dec-2012, 11:10
  3. 5x7 bench top enlargers
    By AnselAdamsX in forum Darkroom: Equipment
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11-Oct-2012, 12:50

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •